Karnataka High Court
Sri Y A Krishnaiah Setty vs The Deputy Commissioner on 5 September, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION No.43914/2019 (SC-ST)
BETWEEN:
SRI. Y.A.KRISHNAIAH SETTY,
S/O LATE Y.ASHWATHANARAYANA SETTY,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
NOW R/AT H.NO.303,
VITTAL NAGARA, B.M.K. LAYOUT,
SLV ENCLAVE, CHAMARAJPET,
BENGALURU - 560 018.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.VIJAYA KUMAR K., ADV.)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KOLAR DISTRICT,
KOLAR - 563 101.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
CHIKKABALAPUR SUB - DIVISION,
CHIKKABALPUR - 562 101.
3. SMT. ADILAKSHMAMMA,
W/O BALACHANDRA,
D/O H.VENKATARAMANAPPA @
VENKATARAVANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
4. SRI PUTTAPPA,
S/O CHIKKA GANGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
SRI. SRINIVASAPPA,
2
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S
5. SRI. GANGANNA,
S/O LATE SRINIVASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
SRI. VENKATARAMANAPPA,
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S
RESPONDENT NO.3 HEREIN AND
RESPONDENT NO.6
6. SRI. MUNAIAH,
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 6 ARE
RESIDING AT KANAGENAKOPPA VILLAGE,
MANCHENAHALLI HOBLI,
GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALAPUR DISTRICT - 561 211.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.ANITHA, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2;
R3, R5 AND R6 SERVED;
R4 HELD SUFFICIENT (24.02.2020))
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH/SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2005 PASSED
BY THE R-1 IN ANNEXURE - A SO FAR AS THE LAND
BEARING OLD SY.NO.3/4, NEW NO.16, NOW MEASURING
35 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT ADDEKOPPA VILLAGE,
MANCHENAHALLI HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
HOLDING THE SAME AS ILLEGAL AND CONSEQUENTLY
QUASH/SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.01.2000 PASSED
BY THE R-2 (ANNEXURE-B) HOLDING THE SAME AS
ILLEGAL AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Land bearing old Sy.No.3/4, new Sy.No.16 measuring 1 acre 1 gunta presently measuring 35 guntas and also Sy.No.72 measuring 14 guntas, both situated at the Addekoppa Village, Manchenahalli Hobli, Gowribidanur Taluk, Chikkaballapur District, the occupancy rights of which was granted to Sri.Govindappa under the provisions of The Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954. These subject lands were conveyed to the petitioner in terms of a registered sale deed dated 10.02.1977 and in pursuance of the same, name of the petitioner was mutated in the revenue records.
2. The third respondent claiming to be the legal representative of the deceased grantee filed a petition under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short `PTCL Act') for resumption and restoration of the subject lands, which were alleged to have been sold in contravention of Section 4(1) of the 4 PTCL Act. The Assistant Commissioner concerned allowed the application and resumed and restored the subject land in favour of the third respondent, against which the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 5 of the PTCL Act before the Deputy Commissioner concerned. The Deputy Commissioner partly allowed the appeal by setting aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, insofar as it relates to 15 guntas of land in Sy.No.72 and confirmed the order in respect of other lands, against which the present petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the occupancy rights of the subject land was granted in favour of the father of the third respondent under the provisions of The Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 and as such subject land is not a granted land as defined under Section 3(1)(b) of the PTCL Act. In support of his submission, he places reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Case of YAMUNAPPA VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS reported in 2001 (4) KCCR 2696 and in case of MOHAMMED JAFFAR AND 5 ANOTHER vs STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS reported in ILR 2002 KAR 4693. He further submits that the application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act was filed after an inordinate delay of more than 32 years from the date of commencement of the PTCL Act and as such, the third respondent is not entitled for restoration of land as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NEKKANTI RAMA LAKSHMI -VS- STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER reported in 2018 (1) Kar.L.R 5 (SC).
4. Learned AGA appearing for the State would submit that the subject land having been sold in contravention of Section 4(1) of the PTCL Act, the authorities concerned were justified in resuming and restoring the subject land in favour of the third respondent and sought for dismissal of the petition.
5. I have examined the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
6. It is an undisputed fact that the occupancy rights of the subject land was granted under the 6 provisions of The Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954. This Court in YAMUNAPPA's case stated supra and MOHAMMED JAFFAR's case has held that grant of occupancy rights cannot fall within the ambit of granted land at all as defined under the PTCL Act. Hence, the subject land is not a granted land as defined under Section 3(b) of the PTCL Act and as such the provisions of the PTCL Act are not applicable in the present case.
7. Even otherwise, the sale deed was executed n favour of the petitioner on 10.02.1977 and the application under Section 5 of the PTCL Act was filed after an inordinate delay of more than 30 years from the date of commencement of PTCL Act.
8. In view of the preceding analysis, the impugned order passed by the authorities is one without authority of law and the third respondent is not entitled for restoration of the land, since the application was filed after an inordinate delay of more than 30 years from the 7 date of commencement of the PTCL Act. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
1. Writ petition is allowed.
2. The impugned order dated 01.04.2005 passed by the first respondent in RA/SC.ST.22/2000-01 at Annexure-A, insofar as, it relates to land bearing old Sy.No.3/4 and new Sy.No.16 measuring 35 guntas situated at Addekoppa Village, Manchenahalli Hobli, Gowribidanur Taluk, Chikkaballapur District, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE RKA